AB vs Ranger MP price

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Smokaz]

I was contemplating a little, like I usually do.

Rangers are 330mp! Fielding a lot of these guys really cuts into your rifle reserve. But they are still fielded, and with the carabine or tank reaper T4 they can be pretty efficient without thompsons.

While airborne, who are very popular with all ab companies, are only 280mp. AB are also generally more effective but more reliant on having to buy a T3 healing doctrine ability vs the Triage's T1.

I think this is pretty strange and the reason behind why infantry companies field a moderate amount of rangers while ab companies always go way overboard under the protocol of "themed companies" and ofc the T4 spam to gain the biggest bonuses.

Are rangers too expensive, or should AB go up to something closer to rangers?

I think so. If AB was increased to 300-310 mp , I think that would be a good change.

[Mysthalin]

I've always thought of rangers as the most in-efficient, pigeon-holed infantry in the game, with the sole exception of commandos(which recently got price buffed).

If anything, it's rangers that should go down to 300 MP, and their thompsons to 140 MU or such. If not even less.

[Sharpshooter824]

Stick them both at an even 300 manpower and go from there.

[Groundfire]

If anything, it's rangers that should go down to 300 MP, and their thompsons to 140 MU or such. If not even less.

+10

When compared to AB, rangers are not that much better to warrant 50mp more a squad.

If it is, then what rly is the price for Elite armor over AB armor?

[Smokaz]

BLEH

Rangers are expensive but they do their job fine

Rangers at vet 3 walk over kch like they were nothing with their thompsons

AB vet 3 doesnt do that, afaik

But AB does a lot of other extremely annoying shit, which warrants a price increase

[Mysthalin]

Balance the units according to their price, then the vet to be balanced in relation to other vet.

Not price the unit upon the veterancy, as that just results in lolfag.

[Smokaz]

Yes, and I think both are priced incorrectly. The rangers are a tad too expensive, and could lose 10-20 mp. Ab could go up to 300.

[Tymathee]

I've said this before and got laughed at...nice to see that when smokaz brings it up people listen, bulllcrap. lol anyway i wholeheartedly agree rangers are too expensive and then they have the same pool value as AB as well like they're just as dangerous. Rangers are just better vs light vehicles than AB but vs tanks, fuggetabout it, they get raped most of the time so u just run.

but i would guess their mp is higher cuz of their AI ability? Then well why are AB rifles 280 as well then? AB used to be 300 if i remember and rangers used to be cheaper.

[spinn72]

Yes, and I think both are priced incorrectly. The rangers are a tad too expensive, and could lose 10-20 mp. Ab could go up to 300.

+100000

[brn4meplz]

You know a price decrease for Rangers to 300(160 Thompson) a price Increase for AB and AB rifles to 300 and a commando price decrease to 320 were so close to going into the price change. I just didn't want to kick "Kick 'em while their down"

The guys who were in vent while I was implementing the changes can attest to how close it was. Expect to see changes to all the factional "Elite Infantry" for the next one